Ask HN: Why be an option/futures/day trader when it is zero-sum?

It's still zero sum. Just one of the winners is the guy charging the commission. Every dollar in commission is a dollar someone else has to lose.

That doesn't make sense. Manufacturing is not zero sum because you're taking things people don't want (raw materials) and turning them into things they do. It's a zero sum game at the atomic level, but not at the wealth level.

Options trading is zero sum because every dollar made by one options trader is lost to another (or to a commission). There's no net wealth generation.

As a person that has been on both the positive and the negative side of the sum, I can tell you that most people don't really think about this when they get into the speculation.

1) Serious quant trader types are rarely good at anything other than mathematics. Even if they are, if they are getting $500k+/yr it would be hard to start as an entry-level engineer for $60k. So most people don't really have an option once they get started in trading.

2) It's addictive. The top hedge fund manager in the US is paid to the tune of $1.7 BILLION per year. On January 2nd the next year, he's back in the office. Once you get in the quickpaced environment of trading everything else looks very boring.

3) It's usually a collective game, so your particular performance is not as important as the performance of the firm. You could do excellent, but somebody else could tank the whole bank. Similarly, you could have a bad year, but if the company is doing OK you'll still get a decent bonus.

After all, the same applies for startups. If you don't assume that you are better than most people at what you do, there's hardly a point in doing it.

But wouldn't the lose leave the game, leaving the previous winners to battle amongst themselves?

Short answer: No, don't do it.

Long answer: For anyone interested in this stuff I highly recommend the book Trading & Exchanges by Larry Harris. The book is about market microstructure, and the knowledge applies to any market whether it's equities or options or online gambling like intrade.com. It's a textbook, so not riveting reading, but great information.

As other posters have pointed out, it depends on how you define zero-sum. Trading is zero-sum, when you compare it against market returns. However, as a trader you are providing services such as immediacy and liquidity. My AAPL stock is more valuable to me as an investor, since there is an active market, and people are willing to sell it to me and buy it from me on short notice, even though I am losing some money to them through the bid-ask spread and execution costs. The other comments about options being useful for spreading out risk are true as well.

As far as the rationality goes, it's rational if you're an expert, you have better information than the market, if reading the above textbook kept you up late at night, etc. Your intuition about the odds are correct, though, so keep your pessimism handy.

So why is my short answer 'no'? Well if you don't have the patience to read the whole post then you definitely shouldn't do it, since learning all the math behind it is going to be way more boring. You've read Taleb which is a good sign. Now that you're at the end the answer is 'maybe', but your wording concerns me: what do you mean by "getting into" options trading? If you're going to get some intensive training and learn from professionals working at reputable investment firms, then great. If you're going to read a few articles off the internet and then dive in, then that is definitely not a good idea. Trading is all about having an edge against the person you're trading with, so a few articles don't improve your odds much.